About your Search

20130201
20130209
STATION
MSNBCW 24
LANGUAGE
English 24
Search Results 0 to 23 of about 24 (some duplicates have been removed)
that is in serious, serious trouble of not moving forward to that cabinet nomination, i want to play what mr. brennan said defending drones, april 30th, 2012. let me play it, please. >> targeted strikes come form to the principle of humanity which requires us to use weapons that will not inflict unnecessary suffering. for all these reasons, i suggest to you that these targeted strikes against al qaeda terrorists are indeed ethical and just. >> if that is the answer we hear today from mr. brennan, what would your response be? >> well, look. every american deserves to see what the rules are. if we are saying we comply with the rule of law and the president said in the inauguration speech, people should know what the law is and the rules and law is hidden and just a tip of the iceberg they're looking at the justice department opinion. mr. brennan has put together an entire playbook and sounds like a video game and an entire playbook on when drones can be used and when they cannot be used and how the killing program will operate and something he just developed and sitting in the white house somewhere. th
that structure that's going to make this country resistant and resilient to those attacks. >> well, mr. brennan, i really look forward to working with you on this because this cuts across all the agencies, the fbi -- those that have responsibility for work outside of this country, inside this country, and yet we all have to be doing what we're using the marine corps saying doing what we're best at and what the we're most needed for. i consider this one of the greatest threats and one of the greatest vulnerabilities because we failed to pass the legislation ourselves. we can't stop what foreign predators want to do. we can divert, identify, and attack, but we are making ourselves vulnerable. now, i want to get to the job of the cia director. i'm going to be blunt and this will be no surprise to you, sir. but i have been on this committee for more than ten years, and with the exception of mr. panetta, i feel i have been jerked around by every cia director. i have either been misled, misrepresented, -- to tell us had weapons of mass destruction in iraq, to porter goss. we know the problems we've
. >> thank you, very much, mr. brennan. i have five short questions that we traditionally ask. if you would just answer them yes or no. do you agree to appear before the committee -- >> chairman of the senate -- >> excuse me. do agree to appear before the committee or other venues when invited? >> yes. >> do you a gree to send personnel when invited? >> yes. >> do you agree to provide documents or any other materials requested by the committee in order for it to carry out its oversight and legislative responsibilities? >> yes, all documents under my authority. >> we'll talk to you more about that in a minute. will you ensure that the cia and officials provide such material to the committee when requested? >> yes. >> do you agree to inform and fully brief to the fullest extent possible all members of this committee of intelligence activities and covert actions rather than only the chairman and vice chairman? >> yes, i will endeavor to do that. >> thank you. now, let me -- and we are going to go in to eight-minute rounds and we'll do it by seniority and alternate from side to side. i wanted t
to mitigate that threat. >> mr. brennan took pointed questions from democrats and republicans alike. but it was the republicans most eager to press mr. brennan on areas other than policy. and on that count, mr. brennan not only parried, he pushed back. >> it is possible to put out an authorized leak, is that correct? >> no, those are oxymorons, authorized leak. >> for more we first now go to nbc's luke russert who is live for us at the white house. luke, i want to get to the brennan hearing in a moment. but, first, the president wants to replace secretary panetta -- the man he wants to replace panetta with, chuck hagel, is having his confirmation held up. now, can you explain inwhat this is about? what's happened? >> reporter: sure. well, the vote for chuck hagel to be confirmed has to come out of the senate armed services committee, and republicans there have asked mr. hagel for really some intense background questions as to whether or not he has been paid by any company that has dealings with foreign companies in the last five years. they want to have all the records about anythin
is your take on what the hearings are going to be like tomorrow for mr. brennan. this should be questions right out of the chute, shouldn't it? >> yes. this is a major component of the president's war on terror. it's a major component of his foreign policy. and listen, there is a difference between operational oversight, which is what congressman rogers was stressing in the interview with andrea mitchell, and legal oversight. and up until this point we really haven't seen any legal justification that the administration has presented for why it can target american civilians abroad if it has determined an imminent threat to the homeland. >> well, it was written today in the "new yorker" that the justification that they're using is a comparison to military troops going into cambodia in vietnam. that's how the nixon administration, they're making that comparison. i don't know how that's going to set with a lot of people. so i'm anxious to hear what mr. brennan does for justification tomorrow. sam? >> let me add one point to that which is the other thing the administration has done is well, we
. >> quickly, senator, have you had any assurances outside of this confirmation hearing with mr. brennan? have you had any assurances from the administration that your request for more information, for more transparency will be met? >> the president certainly indicated he is committed to that. in fact, in our conversation on wednesday night when he called to say that he was going to reverse course, make these documents available, and i said i was encouraged by that, he said he was going to begin an extensive discussion with the american people on these issues to look at fleshing out how to play the public into the discussion of the guidelines with respect to modern warfare where we can both protect our nation and be true to our principles and our checks and balances. i think that would be very helpful right now to have that discussion. >> ron wyden, member of the senate intelligence committee, thanks for your time. >> thank you. >>> a check on how wall street will close out the week is up next in the market rundown. and a live picture here of milford, connecticut. we're keeping a close eye on
mr. brennan began his testimony, five code pink protesters did their thing one after another, pop, pop, pop, pop, pop, in a single several-minute span. >> thank you. a heartfelt thank you also goes to my family in new jersey, especially my 91-year-old mother dorothy, my 92-year-old father owen, who emigrated from iermd nearly 65 years ago -- >> and mr. brennan, if you don't know who they are, i have a list. i have a list of all the names and the -- >> all right. i'm going to -- we're going to halt the hearing. i'm going to ask that the room be cleared and that the code pink associates not be permitted to come back in. we've done this five times now and five times are enough. >> five times will be plenty for you code pink associates. associates? i wonder if that is the hierarchy. senator feinstein today clearly wanted to get on with it, right? regardless of how you feel about the cia or killing people outside war zones or john brennan or the senate or for that matter dianne feinstein you kind of have to tip your hat to the code pink folks just on operational grounds, right? i mean,
civilian casualties within those? any concept? collateral damage? >> it wasn't the best part of mr. brennan's testimony yesterday, there has been significant collateral damage. the numbers are obviously -- whether it's hundreds or thousands -- the real question is, you've got to ask yourself on a cost benefit way, yes. at times innocents are going to be hurt. you've got to ask yourself don rumsfeld's questions. what you are accomplishing against terrorists, is that to some extent offset by the fact that you're alienating populations and governments with whom you have to work? that's the question we have to constantly ask ourselves, this cost benefits test. >> john, it's donny. if we got to the point and as i listen to mr. brennan, where we were going to do a drone strike against an american citizen, it would be the most desperate of times, and i don't want to have to go through a fisa court, and i've got no problem with them doing it. >> i understand your feeling on that. the issue here is -- gene robinson in his column today raises a good point. he says if this were going on under george w
, you can target them. mr. brennan, what about 15, 14, 11, 9? the law cares a great deal about consent and meaningful participation. contrary to what we have in the public debate and polling which shows, yes, in general you can do it. but when you get into american children off the battlefield as conventionally defined, i think you're in tough territory and i think brennan was wrong on that. >> well, this effort -- i don't even want to call it a war -- this effort has been off the battlefield since september 11th. >> what do we call a battlefield now? >> this i think is a very serious problem. i don't think it's a question that can be answered. these are all great questions. here's what i don't see. i don't see how, under the way business is done now and how it's always been done, i don't see how any of the questions can publicly addressed. the amount of intelligence that they would have to open up and hand over to you to answer any of the questions you asked would presumably compromise everything that they were trying to do. >> i have a slight disagreement with that. i think you're ri
's a covert program. for the public it doesn't exist. well, i think that rationale, mr. brennan, is long gone. >> john brennan would not commit to additional disclosures, but he defended the legality of the program. >> the president has insisted that any actions we take will be legally grounded, will be thoroughly anchored in intelligence, will have the appropriate review process, approval process before any action is contemplated, including those actions that might involve the use of lethal force. >> to be fair, it sounds like the bush administration all over. democrats and republicans voiced their concerns, but it was independent senator from maine angus king who questioned the executive power of the president. >> having the executive being the prosecutor, the judge, the jury, and the executioner all in one is very contrary to the traditions and the laws of this country. >> unilateral execution power of the president is causing concern among progressives in america. no doubt about it. democratic senator ron wyden asked brennan, how can the united states target americans who have been denied
, robin, in what you just heard? is that a consistent narrative from mr. brennan? >> not completely obviously, saying sometimes it produces information and sometimes it isn't -- >> not enough to derail this nomination. >> i don't think so. i think brennan probably compared with hagel is going to be a breeze to get through, but these are issues. and this is what this testimony actually illustrates, that really tug at the heartstrings of americans. we have had a traumatic decade. we have come away questioning tactics of torture, the use of guantanamo bay. the legal justification not fully understood. the drone issue still not fully explained because it's so secret. there's still a lot the american public is struggling to understand. >> dan, one reaction that i have relative to the whole standard of when we could take out even an american is, you know, be careful before you make your decision based on the occupant of the white house because precedent is being set here, and whatever the drill might be for today could apply to president clinton in 2016. it could apply to president rubio
, by people who, you know, mr. brennan and how far down does it go? to a general? to a colonel? and there is no due process here whatsoever. and i'm curious. robert greenwald, your thoughts. why wasn't this memo released to the public by the obama administration? >> the obama administration is doing everything in its power to keep every single aspect of this disastrous and horrific policy of assassinating people in other countries. they're doing everything they can to keep it hidden. >> assassinating? you're saying -- you're saying assassinations are taking place? is that what you call it? >> yes, that's what i'm calling it. with people around the world who have not been tried by a jury, there has been no evidence against them, and we are guessing, remember this, we are guessing this and accusing them of things that we have absolutely no firm evidence about. i was in pakistan. i spent a lot of time talking to people, ed. we've talked about this. it's heartbreaking on a moral level, and it's absolutely disastrous on a security level. >> i'm surprised that there are veteran senat
, if they are high level terrorist targets, lawmakers interrogated john brennan for over three hours yesterday over the drone issue and other war tactics. it was explosive at times with brenn brennan defending the action. >> with the exception of mr. panetta, i feel like i've been jerked around by every cia director. >> 11 united states senators asked to see any and all legal opinions but when i went to read the opinions this morning, it is not clear that that is what was provided. >> we only take such actions as a last resort to save lives, when there's no other alternative to taking an action that's going to mitigate that threat. >> they won't even tell congress what countries we are killing children in. >> please -- >> senator feinstein zsh if you could please expedite the removal. >>> we have michael isakoff, and the correspondent who obtained the white page memo, jim warren, chicago editor of the daily beast and newsweek and karen finney and john braybender. michael, i want to start with you because it was your reporting that started all of this for the american people to get to learn more abo
Search Results 0 to 23 of about 24 (some duplicates have been removed)